They enabled / assisted cheating at gambling in one of two ways. (1) If there were bets placed on that particular match, then the bowling of deliberate no balls to
order clearly assisted others to cheat at gambling. (2) Even if no
bets were to be placed on that match, and it was all about demonstrating the power of the fixer to arrange events,, their actions clearly assisted his enterprise, which was all about cheating in relation to gambling. I really don't see a problem with that as a basis for a prosecution. As fred points out, though, the issue will all be about the defendants' state(s) of mind. And if there is any evidence of coercion, that of course will be quite properly relied on by the defence.

Having said all of which, we would most of us be well advised to take a dose of humility and accept that we don't know either the evidence or the law in the same detail as do the CPS lawyers (and that even includes dear old social who seems to be holding himself as some sort of expert in these matters). Fred an honourable exception from a
legal perspective although I'm sure he'd be the first to say that without access to the evidence in the hands of the CPS we are all basically guessing here.

I guess you are right, especially about the evidence part. And Fred did mention earlier that the gambling act did not discriminate on whether bets were placed or not. However I would like to repeat what I wrote earlier, which was that during Majeed and Amir's phone conversation, Majeed was treating him like dirt, by swearing at him and intimidating him. This to me seems as if Amir was being coerced into the whole thing.

@ Fred

Can a defendant request the court for the CPS's evidence in order to prepare for his case or will he have to guess what evidence the CPS is holding and prepare his defence according to that?

Can a defendant request the court for the CPS's evidence in order to prepare for his case or will he have to guess what evidence the CPS is holding and prepare his defence according to that?

A Defendant is entitled to see all of the case against before he decides how to plead - you usually get some additional evidence served during the course of the proceedings after a not guilty plea but the CPS cannot "ambush" a Defendant - prior to around 1997 the defence, on the other hand, were allowed to play their cards close to their chest and not disclose their defence in advance but those rules have been eroded since then and the defence do now have to state in advance what defence is being run

So sad that such a talent has gone to waste. I don't think we'll see another 18 year old who can swing the new ball both ways at 85-90 mph and then reverse it at the death. Plus he could have been a decent bat.

"It therefore followed that the three players' defences before us were different. Mr Butt accepted there was a fix, but denied that he was a part of it. Mr Asif asserted that Mr Butt was a part of a conspiracy and that he himself was, as we shall explain, the unwitting instrument of Mr Butt. Mr Amir denied his involvement in any fix, the existence of which he did not formally accept." Later it confirms the report that Asif's defence of the no-ball was that Butt had told him to "run faster", which caused him to over-step.